|
|
Post by Maggie on Oct 4, 2005 13:28:33 GMT -5
For anyone who is trying to understand the Peterson case, and why some people feel so strongly that Scott is innocent...... the link I'm about to post is a must read. Many feel strongly that Conner was planted, and that it is obvious and can be proven.... that means that Scott Peterson is 100% innocent because Scott was being watched 24/7 by police, and had been for many months. Please don't let the name of the site scare you into thinking it's bias.... the data is real, and not "opinion". www.scottisinnocent.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by rain on Oct 4, 2005 13:52:17 GMT -5
I read all this information and I actually did find it very interesting. Did it "convince" me sp is innocent? Nope, but keep trying because THIS is the way to win people to your side!!! :-) Water moves, pushes, and adjusts soooo much, I think it would be hard to prove this theory either way. If it is supposed to be such proven info to free sp, why didn't it work??? Why din't his lawyers slam this part home??? Didn't find that in article or transcripts.
|
|
|
|
Post by caphill on Oct 13, 2005 21:47:19 GMT -5
I read all this information and I actually did find it very interesting. Did it "convince" me sp is innocent? Nope, but keep trying because THIS is the way to win people to your side!!! :-) Water moves, pushes, and adjusts soooo much, I think it would be hard to prove this theory either way. If it is supposed to be such proven info to free sp, why didn't it work??? Why din't his lawyers slam this part home??? Didn't find that in article or transcripts. The record of the tides and currents and wind is not theory. The large rocks that the baby had to cross over is not theory. Read the transcripts of Dr. Cheng, the hydrologist. The theory was the closing arguments by the prosecution. The jury disregarded any and everything that did not match the prosecution's and their many theories. If you listen to the interviews from the jury they came up with their many different theories of what may have, could have happened. They were all over the board on their own independent theories. One believed it was a premeditate plan months prior and some believed it was an argument that got out of control at bedtime on the 23rd. A man sentenced to death on many unproved theories is why there is a growing movement to appeal the verdict. |
|
|
|
Post by moghirl on Oct 14, 2005 3:10:38 GMT -5
I read all this information and I actually did find it very interesting. Did it "convince" me sp is innocent? Nope, but keep trying because THIS is the way to win people to your side!!! :-) Water moves, pushes, and adjusts soooo much, I think it would be hard to prove this theory either way. If it is supposed to be such proven info to free sp, why didn't it work??? Why didn't his lawyers slam this part home??? Didn't find that in article or transcripts. The record of the tides and currents and wind is not theory. The large rocks that the baby had to cross over is not theory. Read the transcripts of Dr. Cheng, the hydrologist. The theory was the closing arguments by the prosecution. The jury disregarded any and everything that did not match the prosecution's and their many theories. If you listen to the interviews from the jury they came up with their many different theories of what may have, could have happened. They were all over the board on their own independent theories. One believed it was a premeditate plan months prior and some believed it was an argument that got out of control at bedtime on the 23rd. A man sentenced to death on many unproved theories is why there is a growing movement to appeal the verdict. Caphill, you have brought a new dimension to this case, your posts are interesting and thought-provoking, thank you. I want to understand WHY many people are convinced Scott P is innocent of this horrible murder.  Certainly, there are new issues, for example the DNA and statistics disparity you pointed out the other day, coming to light now, and it will be through new members, like yourself who've studied specific aspects of this case, that will help find the real truth of how Laci Peterson and baby lost their lives. Is it mentioned in the transcripts or anywhere else, how long it would take to mutilate or cut off  any body parts, the way Laci was ? You'd imagine it would;ve taken longer than Scott P had that day, and would've left a right bloody mess. No blood or evidence of any butchery was discovered , although I imagine had there been any at all, the police woulda found it. To someone who was not bombarded with media reports here in the UK, I feel there are probably still many more discrepancies in the Peterson case that we don't know about as yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Oct 14, 2005 14:18:37 GMT -5
Keep reading Moghirl.....
The truth versus LE/media spin and media brainwashing is nothing less than scary.
|
|
|
|
Post by tikarose on Oct 18, 2005 17:45:42 GMT -5
Scott was not accused of dismembering the body of his wife. Laci was suppose to have been weighted down in water and the decomposition/water currents etc were suppose to have been responsible for the condition she was in. In my opinion: There are an awful lot of questions in this case, and some of the most powerful ones in my mind involve the jury, but don't get me going on that. As far as I'm concerned there was a whole crowd outside that Redwood City courtroom, that are as guilty of muder in their hearts, as they THINK Scott is! I don't care how much I might want someone convicted of a crime, I do not think it's a cheering happy matter. Caphill, you have brought a new dimension to this case, your posts are interesting and thought-provoking, thank you. I want to understand WHY many people are convinced Scott P is innocent of this horrible murder. Certainly, there are new issues, for example the DNA and statistics disparity you pointed out the other day, coming to light now, and it will be through new members, like yourself who've studied specific aspects of this case, that will help find the real truth of how Laci Peterson and baby lost their lives. Is it mentioned in the transcripts or anywhere else, how long it would take to mutilate or cut off any body parts, the way Laci was ? You'd imagine it would;ve taken longer than Scott P had that day, and would've left a right bloody mess. No blood or evidence of any butchery was discovered , although I imagine had there been any at all, the police woulda found it. To someone who was not bombarded with media reports here in the UK, I feel there are probably still many more discrepancies in the Peterson case that we don't know about as yet. |
|
|
|
Post by moghirl on Oct 19, 2005 2:20:15 GMT -5
Scott was not accused of dismembering the body of his wife. Laci was suppose to have been weighted down in water and the decomposition/water currents etc were suppose to have been responsible for the condition she was in. In my opinion: There are an awful lot of questions in this case, and some of the most powerful ones in my mind involve the jury, but don't get me going on that. As far as I'm concerned there was a whole crowd outside that Redwood City courtroom, that are as guilty of muder in their hearts, as they THINK Scott is! I don't care how much I might want someone convicted of a crime, I do not think it's a cheering happy matter. Caphill, you have brought a new dimension to this case, your posts are interesting and thought-provoking, thank you. I want to understand WHY many people are convinced Scott P is innocent of this horrible murder. Certainly, there are new issues, for example the DNA and statistics disparity you pointed out the other day, coming to light now, and it will be through new members, like yourself who've studied specific aspects of this case, that will help find the real truth of how Laci Peterson and baby lost their lives. Is it mentioned in the transcripts or anywhere else, how long it would take to mutilate or cut off any body parts, the way Laci was ? You'd imagine it would;ve taken longer than Scott P had that day, and would've left a right bloody mess. No blood or evidence of any butchery was discovered , although I imagine had there been any at all, the police woulda found it. To someone who was not bombarded with media reports here in the UK, I feel there are probably still many more discrepancies in the Peterson case that we don't know about as yet. If Scott P was not accused of dismembering his wife, how does that account for the fact she was found missing body parts ? From the trial transcripts I've read, so far there doesn't seem to be an explanation for the baby being full-term or Laci's uterus being two weeks post-partum..... |
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on May 23, 2006 22:27:12 GMT -5
The most compelling evidence, according to many, was that the bodies of Laci and Conner were found 'exactly' where Scott was boating on the day that Laci was abducted. Let us look at that.
According the state's witness Cheng, an oil slick which was created along Scott's route would never have been found where Laci's body was found. Even though Laci's body showed signs of water immersion (barnacles etc.) it therefore cannot be connected in place to Scott. Equally, although both bodies appeared in the bay environs and were easily found, this occurred after almost 4 months and after one of the most extensive searches of the bay ever performed. Therefore Laci's body and that of Conner cannot be connected in time to Scott. We are left with connecting Conner's body to Scott in space.
What about Conner then? Cheng claimed that his body location was consistent with Scott's boating route (if he was an oil slick). However,
No evidence was offered that Conner was ever in the water of the bay and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have come to be so far up on the shore (24 feet) from the water and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have made it through the breakwater unscathed and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have become as entangled in the twine as he was when he was found.
Thus Conner cannot be connected to Scott in time or in space. Others have shown that Cheng miscalculated or misrepresented the evidence he gave. Given that Conner cannot be connected to Scott even in the most extreme reading of the facts it is clear that others placed him, and by implication Laci, where AND when they were found.
Given that Cheng also misrepresented all of the tide and wind data he used in his 'charting', his evidence fails to be of any value whatsoever. All we have left is the 'closeness' of the bodies to where Scott once spent a few hours months before the bodies were found. Millions had such access. The argument is made that no one else would 'go to the trouble to dump the bodies there'. Then why would Scott? He had many easier options. He could have driven up into the hills and dumped the body with a good chance it could never be connected to him. If he had the 24 hours that is believed by many he could have driven east and hidden the body in many other places - perhaps even in another state. The prosecution 'theory' is ludicrous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on May 25, 2006 13:29:57 GMT -5
Glad to see you posting Happy.
You are absolutely correct in that Cheng used INCORRECT DATA. I think this is going to be an important appeal issue, as it should.
|
|
|
|
Post by plove360 on May 26, 2006 10:03:11 GMT -5
What gets me is how they tried to make Scott looking up currents and tides , Sorry I live on the beach and I do that all the time before I plan to go to play in the ocean, I dont want to go with high tide or strong rip currents, So it is not uncommon for someone going fishing or even swimming in the ocean to look this type of info up before deciding what day to go. Plus I want to know things like water temp . Sorry but the ocean is a big place and I am not going into it with sharks and Jelly fish etc without all the information I can have Rip currents can kill you
|
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on May 26, 2006 12:20:00 GMT -5
What gets me is how they tried to make Scott looking up currents and tides , Sorry I live on the beach and I do that all the time before I plan to go to play in the ocean, I dont want to go with high tide or strong rip currents, So it is not uncommon for someone going fishing or even swimming in the ocean to look this type of info up before deciding what day to go. Plus I want to know things like water temp . Sorry but the ocean is a big place and I am not going into it with sharks and Jelly fish etc without all the information I can have Rip currents can kill you Not to mention, the alleged "research" lasted about 30 seconds per page and was weeks before...... so what good was it 12/24?  When people are brainwashed, the actual facts don't matter. |
|
|
|
Post by fallonnev on Jun 2, 2006 22:06:16 GMT -5
An oil slick floats on the surface, which may or not be indicative of subsurface currents. At any rate, hydrology as an exact science is fantasy. There are far too many variables to speak in absolutes.
The bodies were found after four months because SF bay is cold (water temp around 54 degrees year round) and that inhibits decomposition of remains.
Human bodies only rise to the surface because of the gases of decomposition cause them to float. If the chest and abdominal cavity had been opened before immersion, his wife would never have been found. (I'm not sure about the fetus).
Interesting link, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jun 2, 2006 23:31:57 GMT -5
An oil slick floats on the surface, which may or not be indicative of subsurface currents. At any rate, hydrology as an exact science is fantasy. There are far too many variables to speak in absolutes. The bodies were found after four months because SF bay is cold (water temp around 54 degrees year round) and that inhibits decomposition of remains. Human bodies only rise to the surface because of the gases of decomposition cause them to float. If the chest and abdominal cavity had been opened before immersion, his wife would never have been found. (I'm not sure about the fetus). Interesting link, though. Laci's body proved she could not have been in the bay for even 84 days and probably much less. That makes Scott innocent. Conner's body was never in the sea. That makes Scott innocent. Someone tied the twine around the baby after he left Laci's body. That makes Scott innocent. No way they were in the bay for 4 months. The crabs would have cleaned them to the bone. |
|
|
|
Post by texasgirl on Jun 22, 2006 17:52:03 GMT -5
I don't like to get into the technical and scientific parts, all I know is that there was NO evidence to convict Scott. I cannot explain some of the circumstantial evidence, nor can I offer any theories, because I don't know the area or the people of Modesto. One thing I do know...if I had been on that jury, it would have been hung, at the very least. There is no way I would have voted guilty with as little real evidence as they had.
The tapes were prejudicial, they proved nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by jack1024 on Jun 22, 2006 18:06:26 GMT -5
What gets me is how they tried to make Scott looking up currents and tides , Sorry I live on the beach and I do that all the time before I plan to go to play in the ocean, I dont want to go with high tide or strong rip currents, So it is not uncommon for someone going fishing or even swimming in the ocean to look this type of info up before deciding what day to go. Plus I want to know things like water temp . Sorry but the ocean is a big place and I am not going into it with sharks and Jelly fish etc without all the information I can have Rip currents can kill you Scott did not just research the tides in the San Francisco Bay, he also researched "how to pass a lie detector test". |
|
Certainly, there are new issues, for example the DNA and statistics disparity you pointed out the other day, coming to light now, and it will be through new members, like yourself who've studied specific aspects of this case, that will help find the real truth of how Laci Peterson and baby lost their lives. Is it mentioned in the transcripts or anywhere else, how long it would take to mutilate or cut off 
any body parts, the way Laci was ? You'd imagine it would;ve taken longer than Scott P had that day, and would've left a right bloody mess. No blood or evidence of any butchery was discovered , although I imagine had there been any at all, the police woulda found it. To someone who was not bombarded with media reports here in the UK, I feel there are probably still many more discrepancies in the Peterson case that we don't know about as yet.